• Rooty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    106
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    They’re called commieblocks if they’re affordable to the average person. If not, they’re “highrise apartments”

    I live in a city with neighbourhoods built during Socialism, they’re spacious, full of greenery and with important services within walkable/bikeable distance. Meanwhile we have new “urban villas”, which are drab concrete boxes with apartments that have bizzare floorplans and seem to be built for money laundering purposes.

    • tomiant@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      drab concrete boxes with apartments that have bizzare floorplans and seem to be built for money laundering purposes.

      I am so happy I’m not alone seeing it. Modern “development” is such a massive scam, in every country it seems like. It’s the new equivalent of logging or mining barons- they buy up land, build shit on it, sell it overpriced, wash their hands and move on to the next project with little regard for long term urban city planning. They are creating forced gentrification.

      • Slotos@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        Soviet development that was driven purely by economic considerations tends to have all the issues of modern development. Well, except car centric planning, but we know why that wasn’t a consideration ever.

        Apartment complexes that didn’t focus just on economy, tended to be way better. And that is missing from modern considerations almost always.

        Still, there’s a reason pre-Soviet areas to this day remain some of the most sought out ones.